"#!$%#@*^$% moderates!" Column in USA Today (Sept 2013)

[Pretzel_Warrior]

This woman has some good thoughts on why it might be the saner course to get back toward moderation and compromise to actually move this country forward.

In my business — psychology — unyielding, strident insistence on extreme positions brings failure in marriage, career and business. Stubbornness about "principles" with no effort to understand and work with other views causes isolation and feuds, in every area of life.

And yet when it comes to politics, the staunch and unbending are yelling. The right sneers that fellow GOP-ers are "RINOs" (Republicans in Name Only); the left bashes "moderate Democrats" in favor of a "good, progressive, populist message," to quote Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2013/09/12/moderates-democrats-republicans-politics-column/2806517/

[delrem]

1. #!$%#@*^$% the 1%

[Pretzel_Warrior]

2. no comment on the commentary I linked?

[delrem]

3. #!$%#@*^$% the 1%, and the hacks that promote that the status quo is "moderate". OK?

[Pretzel_Warrior]

4. I don't think that was what the column was saying

but I see you may want to also read this one.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023969933

[delrem]

5. Well, I don't like the 100% flexible word "moderate", which stands for whatever status quo.

Clearly you like identifying yourself as a "moderate", and those who want change "extremists", but I don't.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

6. why would you say I don't want change? That's ludicrous!

[delrem]

7. Because you 100% consistently use the term 'moderate' to defend the status quo.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

9. That's flat out not the case. Look for links where I said it. Here's the deal

I don't feel it is a necessary act of a citizen in a democracy to rake their current administration over the coals over every little thing going on from one week to the next. I look at progress vs. lack of progress on social and economic issues. Not just ebb and flow of progress--but real progress.

Based on that, 2 of the biggest are health care insurance reform and the equality of GLBT community with regard to marriage and serving in the military openly among other things. Those are big things that aren't going to be easily rolled back.

There are other things I see virtually no progress on. Efforts to reduce CO2 emissions, immigration reform, draw down of our military spending, closing of Guantanamo.

But I am seeing enough progress to not go ape shit every other day like some people seem to enjoy doing.

[cali]

11. bwahahaha. more like you have a fit at so much as a HINT of criticism of any kind

funny that YOU don't list the fact that women are getting kicked in the teeth. You don't list that as a gauge of progress. Of course not.

Nor do you list the growing gap between rich and poor, the destruction of the middle class.

I've seen criticism of the administration on the things you don't see progress on and you immediately go ape shit.

gad. cogdis.

[delrem]

12. Well, for it being "flat out not the case" you sure are a case study of the opposite.

I didn't rake the GWB admin over the coals for its emergency plan for AIDS relief. But that didn't stop me from some blistering criticism. You don't seem to be so discriminating when it's a Dem in the hot seat.

[Chan790]

17. I think she's full of crap?!

Moderation between a sane position and an insane position yields an insane position. There is no compromise that is a good compromise between the correct policy and an incorrect policy.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

20. that's not really what moderates are. Most have pretty clear position on taxes, immigration

food stamps, military spending, etc. And it is the mix of their views that make them moderates. Not because they survey the landscape of extremes and strike a position exactly in the middle.

[cali]

22. Diana Medved: NOT A MODERATE, preaching false equivalency

[Chan790]

23. We've all heard those positions from many of the "moderates" here of late.

Holding an array of positions of varying conservatism ranging from mildly-conservative to strongly-conservative in opposition to the radical-conservatism of the late unlamented tea-party-corrupted GOP does not make one a moderate.

[cali]

32. too often "moderates" is a rallying cry to destroy liberals. that's what's wrong with it.

And you make a claim with no supporting evidence. YOUR definition of moderate isn't the be all and end all.

[JoeyT]

8. So which group do you think we should compromise with?

The racists? The homophobes? The misogynists? Whose rights are you willing to give away?

The moderation fetishists never seem to be willing to answer that question. You call for moderation, you name the group you think we should be willing to throw to the wolves.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

10. we should work with moderate Republicans on immigration reform

we should work with moderate Republicans on tax reform. We can easily work with Republicans on a host of issues if there were a critical mass of moderates on both sides encouraging such cooperation.

No, instead I'm being screamed at that moderation means equivocating in the face of racism or attacks on homosexuals or women. Uh, no. Moderation doesn't mean giving in. It means not being an extremist "I'll take my ball and go home if I don't get 100% of what I want."

Oh, and using a word like fetishist to describe political moderates? Yeah, pretty incendiary and not helpful to any political discourse. If people with your attitude started to hold sway over Democrats, it would be the snake eating its tail syndrome similar to what Republians and extremists in Tea Party are putting themselves through.

[cali]

13. name those moderate repubs

and you're the one screaming about how you're being 'picked on'.

evidently anyone who's liberal at all is an "extremist" in your eyes.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

15. Mccain and Graham come to mind for immigration though I loathe much of their policy mindset.

my point is if we're NOT able to get any forward progress on the issues, it is because there are extreme people standing in the way and we need more moderates who are willing to consider the pros/cons of an issue and not just reject some things out of hand.

For instance, I see nothing wrong with including some level of hoops to go through for anyone given path to citizenship who originally came here without appropriate visas or who overstayed visas. Because it isn't fair for them to walk into the country while others around the world are waiting years for visas to come in a way specificed by law.

[Chan790]

18. No.

Those are not moderates. They're dyed in the wool conservatives and at least one of them is a racist.

[cali]

25. and the author of the piece that the op has so lovingly posted

is a wingnut type. False equivalency is disgusting.

[Gravitycollapse]

14. Yeah...no, fuck that.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

16. what does that even mean?

you think moderation is a horrible concept? You refuse to click on my link? or what?

[Chan790]

19. I think moderation is a horrible concept. n/t

[cali]

21. wow. what a steaming pile that article is

false equivalency of the worst lying ass kind.

the author links to uber wingnut hater Jonah Goldberg to make the case that Tom Harkin is an extremist- and uses a partial quote by Harkin that isn't remotely extreme or hateful. And that's it. That's the only dem she names. She doesn't note the baggers in the House at all.

In fact, the author is a right winger. She's an avowed social conservative. She writes for such outlets as the very right wing Townhall. Oh, and she's against marriage equality.

http://townhall.com/columnists/dianemedved/

Figures you'd admiringly post a right wing hit piece.

[cali]

24. hey, gentle thread readers: This is a hit piece on dems using false equvialency

The author is a wingnut writer for Townhall and a self-avowed social conservative who is trying to make out that dems are just as extremist as repubs. It's bullshit of the worst kind.

Anyone surprised by the op posting it?

[Jamaal510]

26. I'm far to the left on the spectrum, but

I really don't know where this ludicrous notion came from that moderates and centrists are somehow "weak" and indecisive. Being a moderate or a centrist has zero to do with not having any principles or being stupid; it basically just means having a balanced mix of both liberal and conservative stances. I would argue that moderates are absolutely necessary for getting things done in D.C. because if both parties become polarized and move too far away from the center, then the only way that things will get done is with 1-party rule (where 1 party has the WH, control of the House, and a Senate supermajority), which is highly unlikely in such a mixed-bag country. The two parties are supposed to work together, and in the interests of Americans.

[cali]

27. Pretzel, for you: More about the rightwinger you so deeply agree with:

Yes, she hates poor people with a passion and you lap up her false equivalency crap.

She's also anti marriage equality and "special rights" for LGBT folks.

And yet you dig in with her.

It's right wing and it's disgusting.

That you admire it isn't a surprise.

http://world-o-crap.blogspot.com/2011/01/your-suffering-is-putting-me-off-my-pu.html

[Warpy]

28. Much of Congress is unable to do that

because their religion forbids any deals with people they have been taught are devils. You will never see any of the fundy true believers in office trying to compromise. They think it's a dirty word and it makes baby Jebus cry.

Men who are utterly sure of everything are the most dangerous men out there because they won't budge an inch. They will threaten fellow party members who do.

Give me a muddler who is never really that certain, willing to compromise and able to tell when things aren't working out as planned and solving the problem a different way is called for.

[cali]

29. The author absolutely implies Tom Harkin is an extremist

She uses an innocuous partial comment of Harkin's as an example of extremism.

Right wing crap and nothing but is what this article is.

You admire it.

She a hater. you post her. She is against what you claim to support. You defend her.

Interesting and revealing.

[Ichingcarpenter]

30. Hosted Rush Lindbaum show

Her husband did.

over thirty times he did








http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Medved

[cali]

31. she's a repulsive creature as well

her hate for the homeless and teh gays isn't hard to find. she claims divorce is one of the greatest evils in our society.


Imagine admiring a piece that categorizes Tom Harkin as a leftist extremist.

[Ichingcarpenter]

35. Moderate Republicans

[cali]

33. taking advice from a right wing piggy who hates the poor, homeless and LGBT folks

and thinks divorce is a societal evil.

wow.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

34. thanks for the kick.

[kydo]

36. People fool themselves with this label

Yes there is a middle but most people are not in it.

In the late 1980's I used to say I was a moderate that leans left. And in a way that was true, I was young and didn't have a voting record. And I wanted to think I would be open to voting for the best person regardless of party.

By the late 1990's I still claimed to be a moderate that leaned left. But that was just a lie I told myself. Because by then I now had a voting record, and to be a moderate I'd have had to of voted re pub at some point, and I never have voted for a repub. It dawned on me in 1999 I was liberal. I said noooooo! But then went wait, its cool to a liberal.

And then for about 2 years (2000-2002), most of the times it depended on my mood and who I am talking to when politics come up on whether I said liberal or moderate. That was the lie I told others. If I didn't want a fight and I was talking to repubs that I liked I'd say I was a moderate.

But by 2002 I couldn't carry the lie any more, so since then when asked I tell people I am a bleeding heart liberal, and I don't give a flip what anyone thinks about it. It's my political preference and I have embraced it, finally.

When most people claim to be a moderate they are full of crap. When people talk about how there needs to be more moderates in politics they too are full of crap.

When people say if only there were more moderate republicans, I LOL and and tell them to get out of the fantasy world because there are NO moderate republicans. If they ever existed they died out a long time ago.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

37. Looks like you are a person of our times

Bunch of extremes saying "fuck compromise".

[kydo]

40. No I didn't say that

besides one does not need to be a moderate to be able to compromise.

[lumberjack_jeff]

38. Stubbornness in politics is a virtue.

It's not like any other kind of negotiation. Neither party can just walk away from it.

In this system, over the long term, the stubborn one will win.

[99Forever]

39. "moderate" = spineless.

None for me thanks.

I'll take integrity and guts over asskissing and weasel words, every time.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

41. Does that go for the "extremists" who founded the country?

Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice. Thomas Paine